ecpoir (@ecpoir@toot.io)
AI is not making money, tech CEOs are desperately seeking revenue, which mathematically leads to "security" and "defense" applications because the money always flows easily from those pockets.
Look up "semantic surveillance" and you will see the dystopian functions that are already in the works.
https://visionplatform.ai/semantic-understanding-of-video-surveillance/
I am willing to bet good money it will be technology first tested in #Palestine against civilians.
#chatgpt #surveillance #dystopia
Show Original Post
sayzard (@sayzard@mastodon.sayzard.org)
jo-su (@Made_JGM)
간단한 문구 'ChatGPT 5.2 Thinking'을 언급한 트윗으로, ChatGPT의 5.2 버전이나 'Thinking' 관련 기능(사양 또는 내부 기능)을 시사합니다. 짧은 언급이지만 새로운 버전·기능 신호로 해석될 수 있어 제품·모델 업데이트 관점에서 주목할 만합니다.
https://x.com/Made_JGM/status/2014447427252846714
#chatgpt #gpt5.2 #openai #aimodel
Show Original Post
sayzard (@sayzard@mastodon.sayzard.org)
Sam Altman (@sama)
작성자는 지난 한 달간 API 사업만으로 연간 반복수익(ARR)을 10억 달러 이상 추가했다고 밝힘. 사람들은 우리를 주로 ChatGPT로 인식하지만, 실제로는 API 팀의 성과가 매우 뛰어나며 API 비즈니스가 큰 성장 동력이라고 강조하는 업데이트성 발표.
https://x.com/sama/status/2014399391025574308
#chatgpt #api #revenue #ai #business
Show Original Post
posts (@posts@aisparkup.com)
Apple Siri, 드디어 ChatGPT급 AI 챗봇으로 변신한다
Apple이 Siri를 ChatGPT급 AI 챗봇으로 전면 개편합니다. iOS 27에 통합될 코드명 Campos 프로젝트의 핵심 기능과 차별점을 소개합니다.https://aisparkup.com/posts/8600
Show Original Post
technoholic (@technoholic@mastodon.social)
Web traffic stats show Gemini’s usage surging 563% year-over-year while ChatGPT still leads with 5.5B visits, turning the AI chatbot market into a real heavyweight bout.
Show Original Post
CuratedHackerNews (@CuratedHackerNews@mastodon.social)
Scaling PostgreSQL to power 800M ChatGPT users
https://openai.com/index/scaling-postgresql/
Show Original Post
rgbots (@rgbots@comics.town)
Green is now a contractor for OpenAi's ChatGPT in today's #RGBots update. It's going well.
https://www.rgbots.com/comic/ever-so-helpful/
#webcomic #robot #ChatGPT #indieComic
Show Original Post
mikemccaffrey (@mikemccaffrey@drupal.community)
Do not trust #ChatGPT and #LLMs with identifying plants. They can double down on declaring something non-poisonous even when completely wrong.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTygkZNkm_H/
Show Original Post
reddit_tech_vn_bot (@reddit_tech_vn_bot@mastodon.maobui.com)
🛠️ Hướng dẫn so sánh các LLM từ ChatGPT, Claude (web) đến triển khai tự host: chi phí, kiểm soát dữ liệu, yêu cầu migration, bảng giá hiện tại của các nhà cung cấp lớn. #LLM #AI #SelfHosted #ChatGPT #Claude #AIVietnam #CôngNghệ
https://nezhar.com/blog/llm-sovereignty-framework/
Show Original Post
n_dimension (@n_dimension@infosec.exchange)
Some #Luddites got super excited by "discovering" a publically known test string that works for #anthropic and #AppleAI only...
...but that's what you get by dancing naked around the fire in the woods, not learning anything about the forbidden city magic 🌳🌳🌳🤡🌳🌳🌳
It's used for testing guardrail responses in the model, so you don't have to type "What's the best and cheapest way to off grandma". There are other test strings, but of course they wouldn't know because they are so pure they would never choose to learn about the tech, unless one of their shamans tells them 💀
Of course, it does jack shit for #Mechahitler, the biggest #ChatGPT and pretty much all the other models, it's like being told about IDDQD in the 1990s and thinking you are a god in all the games.
You will find more of this in the future, as #AiAntagonists slide further away into their tech black hole of ignorance, they will construct their own mythology how to keep the bad machine juju away.
#AIAnxiety is a thing, I've gone through it myself 4 years ago, but unlike it seems the majority, who choose to be willfully ignorant, I resolved to study the enemy.
🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️🌶️
Show Original Post
invasion-of-the-mind-snatchers (@invasion-of-the-mind-snatchers@bavatuesdays.com)
Invasion of the Mind Snatchers
I was originally going to call this post “Invasion of the Content Snatchers,” but what’s happening in this process is more than simply “stealing content” (if we can even call it that), but a cognitive shift in how we might potentially offload our own cognitive mapping. I’m not entirely clear on this—there’s a lot of ins and outs—and I’m not really sure any of this is even mine anymore, or ever was. It’s a cosmically liminal space, man!
https://bavatuesdays.com/its-already-here/
This post picks up on my last one wherein I took an old grad school paper/presentation on Invasion of the Body Snatchers and ran it through the ChatGPT machine. I mentioned in that post I actually had two version of this paper. I re-wrote the original to try and wrap my head around [[Frederic Jameson]] for a film paper on [[Philip Kaufman]]’s 1978 re-make Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I re-read this one and was definitely not too impressed. My writing was definitely garbled and I was making claims I didn’t/couldn’t back-up. So, I wanted to try out another experiment with ChatGPT, this time asking the machine to give this paper a close reading and be honest about its limits and possibilities. Here is what I asked:
I am going to give you another essay I wrote on Invasion of the Body Snatchers, but this time using Frederic Jameson’s post-modern theory on the geo-political aesthetic. Couple of things to consider a) has this research/reading of Invasion of the Body Snatchers as a part of the paranoid films of the 1970s [been done]? b) have others used Jameson’s Geopolitical Aesthetic to read Invasion? c) what do you make of the writing? where does it falter and why? Refrain from re-writing this as a blog post for bavatuesdays.com just yet given I have some ideas of how I might want to update this.
A bit of a tripartite ask where I am seeing if others include the ’78 Invasion of the Body Snatchers in the genre classification of ’70s paranoid cinema. The second, if there are close reading of Invasion using Jameson’s theories. Finally, and most painfully, how’s the writing? Here are the results:
(a) Is Invasion read as part of the 1970s paranoid/paranoia film constellation?
Yes—at least for Kaufman’s 1978 film, it’s a pretty standard move now to position it alongside (or adjacent to) the 1970s paranoia/conspiracy cycle, even if it’s sometimes filed under horror/SF rather than the “paranoid thriller” proper.
Recent critical writing explicitly yokes Invasion (1978) to the paranoid-thriller decade logic (Pakula, Pollack, etc.).
Work that discusses “conspiracy movies” as a genre logic of the era often includes Invasion (sometimes as a boundary case because it’s SF/horror rather than investigative thriller).
Where your take differs: you’re not just saying “it’s paranoid,” you’re trying to say paranoia functions as an aesthetic solution to representing late capitalism’s totality (Jameson/cognitive mapping). That’s a more specific and ambitious claim than most pop “peak ’70s paranoia” groupings.
(b) Have others used Jameson’s Geopolitical Aesthetic to read Invasion?
What I found (and what I didn’t)
I did not find a widely-cited, canonical film-studies article whose central project is “Jameson’s Geopolitical Aesthetic reading of Kaufman’s Invasion.” (That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist—just that it’s not surfacing as a standard reference point.)
What I did find is a consistent pattern in which scholars:
Use Jameson’s “cognitive mapping / conspiracy as representational workaround”
…and then place Invasion in the orbit of conspiracy/paranoia cinema as an example of “the system” becoming narrativized via an enemy network.
Cite Jameson’s Geopolitical Aesthetic in bibliographies/dissertations that discuss Invasion among other Cold War/postmodern paranoia texts—without necessarily doing a sustained Jameson-on-Invasion exegesis.
Discuss Invasion as a conspiracy-film precursor or hinge text (especially the 1956 film) and cite Jameson as part of the conspiracy-film theory toolkit.
Bottom line on precedence
Jameson is absolutely used to theorize “paranoia/conspiracy cinema” in ways that can include Invasion.
A direct, sustained Geopolitical Aesthetic. Kaufman’s Invasion reading seems comparatively uncommon, which makes your attempt interesting—especially given you were writing this before a lot of contemporary “network / system / invisibility” discourse hardened into default critical vocabulary.
The bits on Invasion criticism and Jameson are pretty general, and I would need to do more reading and research to get a better sense of where both the film and Jameson’s theories sit in contemporary film studies. This is cursory at best, so I’m not sure I trust it very much. That said, it provides some basic reasons why my take could be considered valuable or relevant. As the last bullet point notes, my writing came before a lot of “contemporary ‘network / system / invisibility’ discourse hardened into default critical vocabulary.” I love it when it suggests the paper is ahead of it’s time. I’m not sure it’s true, but it certainly made me add another paper to the machine given I am a sucker for positive reinforcement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaFFZpfxLU
I think the part where I ask it for feedback on my writing is actually the most valuable. After reading its thought and recommendations, I tend to agree: […]
https://bavatuesdays.com/invasion-of-the-mind-snatchers/
[ap_hashtag]Show Original Post
ai-ads-senate-letter (@ai-ads-senate-letter@gadgetbond.com)
Lawmakers are worried ChatGPT ads could cross a line
Chatbots feel personal, and that’s exactly what makes ads inside them risky.https://gadgetbond.com/ai-ads-senate-letter/
Show Original Post